The Story Within The Story… The fish market debate

Dec 09, 2018 Features / Columnists, News

---

 

By Leonard Gildarie

In recent years, the stress on being politically correct has never been more evident.
One has to be careful when writing. You can’t name a rape victim and publish details that could identify that person.
Let’s say that a father rapes his daughter and is being charged or sentenced. The reporting can only confine itself to identifying the father and be limited to possibly saying that a Grove welder or Industry seaman is jailed 20 years for raping a 5-year-old. There can be no mention of daughter or neighbour or niece.
One quickly becomes familiar also with terms such as handicapped, differently abled, physically challenged, retarded, and derogatory words describing people’s ethnicity.
People are sensitive. One slip and organizations are calling the newsroom to express their displeasure. We have to be careful.
Currently, the National Assembly is debating the 2019 National Budget and is set next week to consider the proposed estimates.
Reportedly, the Speaker of the House, Dr. Barton Scotland, has warned Members of Parliament to raise the standard of their debate.
It is no laughing matter. We spoke on the respect that senior public servants had for the authority of Parliament recently ,as evidenced by their continued breaches of the country’s spending. Year after year they return to the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) to give excuses of breaches that have cost this country hundreds of millions of dollars.
One can conclude that the breaches are deliberate and that there is no fear from what appears to be toothless PAC.
Had Parliament really taken a tougher stance over the years, this level of disrespect would never have reached this level.
So we are back at the performance of our elected representatives.
There are strict rules on how MPs should conduct themselves in the National Assembly.
The Parliament of Guyana has a publication – The Standing Orders of the National Assembly. It is actually quite detailed and was amended only in 2011. It is a must-read for not only Parliamentarians, but reporters and Guyanese at large. It was amended in 2011 by the Special Select Committee on the Report of the Draft Standing Orders.
For example, in Chapter VII, under Rules of Debate, it says that no member shall speak unless called upon by the Speaker or Chairperson. In fact, if two or more members rise at the same time, the Speaker or Chairperson shall call upon the member who first catches his or her eyes.
Paragraph 6 of that section says that a member shall not read his or her speech except with the leave of the Speaker, but he or she may read extracts from books or papers in support of his or her argument, and may refresh his or her memory by reference to notes.
We know from the coverage that many MPs struggle and would read an entire speech.
In fact, the newspapers are being sent speeches from the MPs. But we will come back to this.
Another section is titled “Rules for Members Not Speaking”.
Under this section, it was warned that an MP present in the Assembly during the debate “shall enter or leave the assembly with decorum”, “shall not read books, newspapers, letters, other documents or read or operate computers or electronic devices, save such as relate to the business before the Assembly, except with the permission of the Speaker”, “shall not read books, newspapers, letters, other documents or read or operate” and “shall maintain silence while another Member is speaking and shall not interrupt”.
An MP is also supposed to conduct himself or herself in a fit and proper manner and not use a cellular phone in a manner which disturbs the assembly.
In that Standing Order rule book, there have been various documented complaints of Speakers on conduct of MPs during sittings and debates.
I would also like to raise the issue of something called a conscience vote – where MPs can decide to veer away from the party stance vote on an issue because he or she feels strongly on it. This does not occur often in Guyana.
With a slim, one-set majority, the practice has predominantly been along party lines.
These issues are important, as we each have our take on how MPs should behave.
Our MPs are supposed to be the cream of the crop. They are supposed to be articulate, educated, open to engage the public, and be prepared to conduct themselves as model citizens at all times. Their lives are expected to withstand the harshest of public scrutiny.
We know that the reality on the ground is different.
We choose MPs because of their work on the ground and their loyalist stance, at least that is what it appears to be. There will of course be a few MPs or party officials who will differ from this view.
Here is the problem. Over the years, many of our MPs are not well-schooled in the rules of engagement in the National Assembly. They loudly thump tables, make cat-calls and constantly interrupt MPs on the floor. It is disconcerting to the persons who are listening.
I agree that it is a not a funeral and the very hallowed chamber should allow for some legroom. However, the interruptions, walkouts and flexing of muscles have all served to reduce the respect of the House. It is clear that quite a few MPs do not prepare properly for the debates. They stumble through their presentations, even when reading.
I humbly suggest that more training be introduced. It is also on the onus of the MPs to continuously educate themselves.
There is no higher calling than being a representative of the people. To reach there is a hard fought battle with voters, that takes millions of dollars in campaign financing, hours of work by the Guyana Elections Commission and an almost standstill of business for elections day.
We have to do better. We must do better.
There are so many issues that need our attention – pension, security, education, projects.
Let us take photos of projects. Use them as backups to our arguments. Wave them around. It is all part of good debate.
Grab the past estimates of expenditure, research them, make comparisons. There are people who can be called upon by parties in the National Assembly to assist in preparations for debate.
Yet we see little debate and more of grandstanding on issues- issues that should be debated. We see mere statements and more of finger-pointing.
The considerations for the National Budget are expected to be over next week. It would have been grueling. It would be taking us into the Christmas season.
As we move into a critical year, the role of Parliament would become critical. We have to ensure that our country benefits.
After all, the MPs who were voted in, all 60-plus of them, were not voted to represent one set of citizens who voted for their party…but rather, they were elected to represent all.

---

---